Understanding Scattered Radiation in Photon Beams

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of scattered radiation in photon beams as they pass through a material of known thickness. Participants explore the definitions and implications of scattered radiation, the interactions that lead to scattering, and the mathematical modeling of photon behavior in this context.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that "scattered radiation" includes photons resulting from various interactions with matter, such as the photoelectric effect, Compton effect, pair production, and coherent scattering.
  • Another participant notes the possibility of photons passing through the material without any interaction at all.
  • It is mentioned that the formula for photon attenuation does not account for "rescattering," as it assumes the incoming radiation is monoenergetic and that the attenuation coefficient depends on photon energy.
  • A participant proposes that for a more detailed analysis, simulations using software like Geant4 may be necessary.
  • There is a discussion about the appropriateness of using LaTeX for equations in the forum, with participants expressing a willingness to adopt this format for clarity.
  • One participant emphasizes that scattering typically removes particles from the incident beam, which is a common approximation in open geometries and collimated beams, although some systems may involve particles returning to the beam after scattering.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the definition and implications of scattered radiation, and the discussion remains unresolved on several points, particularly concerning the interactions and their contributions to the total photon count.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations regarding the assumptions made about the energy of incoming photons and the simplifications involved in the mathematical modeling of scattering processes.

eneacasucci
Messages
69
Reaction score
18
TL;DR
scattered radiation of photons when passing through a material
Consider a source emitting a beam of photons. These photons pass through x thickness of material. The attenuation coefficient of the beam \mu is known.
We can write this formula
1683192752250.png

1683189958516.png

If I'm not wrong, this formula tells us the number of photons that passed through the material of thickness x without interacting with it (
1683190403717.png
), but it does not tell us the "real" total number of photons that we should expect to see beyond this material (
1683190424672.png
) given by the sum of the first ones and the "scattered radiation".
My question is about what do we mean with "scattered radiation"?.
This is what I think about: "scattered radiation" are the photons resulting from the interaction of the primary beam with matter, that can happen in these ways:
1)photoelectric effect: with characteristic x-ray emission
2)Compton effect: in which the original photon loses energy, which is transferred to an electron
3)pair production: in which additional photons may be emitted if positron-electron annihilation occurs
4)coherent scattering: photon undergoes deflection but does not lose energy


Are these photons (1,2,3,4) the ones constituting the so-called "scattered radiation"? is there something else?P.S. To get a correct estimate of the photons passing through the material, thus also considering scattered photons, I should add a correction term, how is it estimated?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
There is also possibility of no interaction at all, right?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: eneacasucci
malawi_glenn said:
There is also possibility of no interaction at all, right?
Yes I think so, as I've written, the number of photons that pass through the material without interacting should be given by this formula
1683192734489.png
 
That formula does not take into account "rescattering" because it is assumed that the in coming radiation is monoenergetic. Keep in mind that ##\mu## depends on the photon energy. For a more detailed treatment you need to perform simulations use e.g. Geant4 software
 
@eneacasucci, could you please use Latex for your equations instead of embedding images? For example ##N(x)=N_0e^{-\mu x}## - there’s a Latex guide linked right below where you type posts/replies.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: eneacasucci
malawi_glenn said:
That formula does not take into account "rescattering" because it is assumed that the in coming radiation is monoenergetic. Keep in mind that ##\mu## depends on the photon energy. For a more detailed treatment you need to perform simulations use e.g. Geant4 software
yes sure, ##\mu## depends on the energy of the photon.
Could I ask if it is possible to have an answer for the green questions in the original post? :) thank you so much for your time
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
Nugatory said:
@eneacasucci, could you please use Latex for your equations instead of embedding images? For example ##N(x)=N_0e^{-\mu x}## - there’s a Latex guide linked right below where you type posts/replies.
Unfortunately I can't edit my original post but I'll try to write everything in latex in future messages and posts, sorry
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman
eneacasucci said:
Yes I think so, as I've written, the number of photons that pass through the material without interacting should be given by this formula
1683192734489-png.png
This follows from assuming that any "scattering" removes the particle from the incident beam, never to be seen again. This is often a good approximation for open geometries and collimated beams. Also it is very easy to apply.
Particles being returned to the beam after repeat scattering are rare although some devices (lasers for instance) rely on this effect , so you need to understand the system. These problems are typically much more difficult to calculate.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71 and eneacasucci
eneacasucci said:
Unfortunately I can't edit my original post but I'll try to write everything in latex in future messages and posts, sorry
That's good enough, no problem.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
13K
  • · Replies 52 ·
2
Replies
52
Views
6K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K